Sgt Schultz

David Newton and credibility have a very distant relationship.

I could see the OP scenario playing out, as almost one extreme. The major assumption is not that the Jets and Dolphins do not pick QBs, it is that there will be no movement in the top 7 picks. The opposite extreme is the belief that 10 QBs will be taken in the first 7 picks. But, I have to think that the teams with the top 7 picks will not be the teams making the top 7 picks. Somebody is going to put a full blitz on moving up, maybe more than one somebody. Particularly about the time the Dolphins pick is announced.

On the other part of that post, does that mean the Saints acknowledge that Taysom Hill just may not turn out to be the greatest QB to grace the planet? I am surprised, said no non-Saints fan ever.

You have to wonder how much of this was involved in coming up with that hypothetical trade.

He drove the Rai-duhs down for what appeared to be the winning score against the Dolphins with :19 left. Then their defense gave the game away allowing an enormous completion with a defender hanging onto Fitzpatrick's face mask in the process. Can't fault Carr because his defense can't hold a lead.

Their defense pretty much lived up to the words "no lead is safe." I'm not convinced they are not going to try and take one last run with Julio and Ryan together, even with a new regime in place. If so, drafting Ryan's heir apparent is not as critical as plugging as many of those holes as they can. If we don't shore up our OL, we'll be drafting up there with them!

That's great and all, but only he knows how long he feels like he can play. Clearly, not long enough for the Lions to be able to make a run, but if he was a turtle he might not have that long. I doubt that he or teams would go into a deal with the assumption he is going to play into his 40's. Aside from the fact that he has taken more hits in Detroit than Brady did in New England or Brees in New Orleans, most guys just hit a point when they want to hang them up while they can walk away, rather than waiting to be carried out. Cam didn't extend his career any by lowering his shoulder and taking on linebackers. But, the injuries that probably shortened his effective career the most happened when he was a passer. It happens. I say "probably" because it is always possible that the blast to the shoulder was the last straw, even though I don't think that is the case. I don't agree with those who think Stafford is some sort of china doll out there, but I do believe from what I have seen and read that if he was still breathing and could stand upright, he was going back out there. That does take a toll. Just because it is not legal for a QB to get hit (or spoken harshly to as the defender rushes by) does not mean he is not going to get hit (or spoken harshly to as the defender rushes by). An aging body does not ask if the hit was legal or not.

Probably, based on age. He has managed to take less abuse than Stafford so the back nine could take as long to play as the front nine did. Wilson somehow has the nine lives of a cat, and that may be because defenders rarely get a straight-on shot at him. He reminds me of a modern-day Tarkenton. Barring him starting to be abused, he could play to an age starting with a "4" if he wanted to and his arm holds out. I don't see that with Stafford. He has played a lot of games in Detroit over the years that involved him "rubbing some dirt on it and going back out there." Rivera would be proud. Age-wise, Stafford will be 33 in a few days, Wilson during the 2021 season. The actual clock is about a half season different, I think. But the effects of that age do hit everybody differently.

Danke, sir. Essentially, he could die of old age as a Texan, owing them two more years (extreme example). I see Mr.Scot just sort of pointed that out. As is almost always the case in labor contract/law issues, it is in everybody's best interest to work in good faith. For Watson, that means honoring his contract and not doing anything that cheapens his value to the Texans. For the Texans, it is reaching a trade agreement that is acceptable to them with a team Watson will go to, or doing something that will cause him to retract his trade demand. Anything short of that involves hurt on both sides.

I won't say he has zero leverage, but his leverage involves potentially returning a huge portion of his signing bonus. You get this, many others do not. The statement about what the no trade clause means is spot on. If the team approaches him saying they want to trade him to the Lions, he can refuse to waive it and that potential trade falls by the way side. But, he approached the team (sort of) saying he wants a trade. That does not waive the no-trade clause, but if he provides them a list of teams he is open to going to and they can't work out a trade that is good for the Texans, he is a Texan. The Texans are not obligated to trade him, they are more or less only obligated to trade him to a team he agrees to go to IF they trade him at all. The signing bonus is not for merely signing the contract. It is for signing the contract and then honoring it. If the team terminates the contract by releasing him, he keeps the signing bonus because he lived up to his end and would have (presumably) honored it until the end had the team not terminated it. If he breaches it and things go completely down the sewer, the pro-rated part of the signing bonus goes with it. BrianS, does he eventually become a free agent or does the contractual clock just stop indefinitely until he returns to the team or announces his retirement? I'm too lazy to look that part up.

Don't confuse our newfound friend with the facts.

Stafford is going to be 33 on Sunday. Why would he want to go to a team that is in the middle of a rebuild rather than one who was in the Super Bowl with a lot of its current roster, has a defense that can take over games, and is maybe a healthy QB away from being able to make a deep push NOW? Who can blame anybody who is on the back end of their career, been in an organization associated with futility, and wants to win or chase a championship not wanting to go to a team who is rebuilding.....even if he thinks the rebuild is heading in the right direction?

The major problem is the fact that we need to find 5 OL starters, 4 if we resign Moton. Redoing the entire OL at once is a recipe for disaster. Our complete inability in the past to tell a decent OL from a rose bush is coming back to haunt us, which is not a surprise. I think that saves him in 2021.

Well, I know a guy who is a plumber. When he was unclogging Watson's toilet, he saw him wearing a Panthers jersey. He was on the phone with his agent, and the plumber overheard Watson mentioning that the Panthers were sending Grier, Whitehead, and Thomas to the Texans for him. The only holdup is the Panthers have to resign Whitehead. Not sure who is a better source, the plumber or the lawn guy? Of course, maybe Scot knows his electrician, in which case we will get the real scoop!

Very glad to hear this.

You don't get it, do you? They were paid off. There was a clandestine meeting. Four guys not associated with the NFL handled handled the actual transaction.

NESN has been on the "Garoppolo back to New England train for a while" and published something two days ago saying he may be the Pats best option for 2021. I've read speculation he could go back there in other places, too. I know Hoodie liked him when they dealt him to San Francisco, and apparently McDaniels is still high on him. Assuming the feeling is mutual, that would solve the no trade clause. Stafford makes sense for San Francisco, and vice versa.

Well, sort of. Dallas also had 12 penalties against Denver in Super Bowl XII and won the game handily (27-10). Granted, the OP was "since 2000" but I am not sure why that would make any difference unless we were cherry picking data.

That might not have been enough to lose that game. Refusing to make open field tackles would have probably resulted in their receivers/ball carriers running to the end zone.....the wrong way. The Foreskins would have lost to the '76 Bucs that day.

Let's keep a few things in mind when looking at who we might pick and who those in front of us might pick. Who is in front of us may well change by the time that pick comes around. While we generally talk about the "big four" QBs, it is very likely teams don't like all four of them. For whatever reason, maybe they don't like Wilson, Fields, or Lance. If you are Detroit at #7 and you don't like one of them, and the other three are gone by the time your pick comes, you aren't likely to pick the one you don't like. You might become part of the first bullet, or you fill another hole and wait. QB needy teams, whether they are ahead of us in the draft order or not, may not be addressing that this year. Jacksonville will. There is some talk the Jets want to give Darnold another shot under somebody not named Gase. They have some big holes other than QB they may opt to fill. Miami has been mocked to pick Sewell or somebody else, feeling that Tua is not a lost cause (or maybe they address that via FA). Somebody ahead of us or wanting to jump ahead of us is going to wind up with Stafford. If Watson leaves Houston, one of them is going to wind up with him. While Detroit is already ahead of us, they are probably looking QB one way or another. Houston might have a hard time moving up unless it involves Watt. We don't know what our own evaluation is of the "big four." We may not like one of them, which makes waiting or trading down and picking Jones more realistic. Our QB depth chart is basically one deep and has been that way for a couple of seasons. We may not like the one that is level that is there, but given where we are in this process and that fact, it makes a guy like Jones even more appealing.....particularly if Rhule and company like him. Same might apply to Lance. We have more than one QB to replace in one manner or another. In two seasons, our QB depth chart could be three completely different names. There are a lot of variables in this equation, both for us and everybody else.

The Bills looked like the Chiefs looked two years ago against the Pats: a team that is close but not quite ready yet.

I think you nailed it. Keep in mind this type of article is largely speculation. A team that just completed year 1 of a multi-year rebuild is probably not in the market for a 30+ year old QB, and vice versa.

Sounds more like pure frustration than anything else. His career is well into the back nine and the Packers can't ever seem to get over the hump. It does pose one question the Packers organization has to answer, at least internally. You have this guy as your starting QB for 13 seasons now, and you have one Super Bowl appearance (and win) to show for it. How? The NFC has not had a juggernaut team in that period that you could not get past. It's not like the P. Manning era in Indy and New England being pretty much a constant. Yesterday, they pretty much gave the game away and then refused to accept it back when Tampa played (on offense) like they did not want it.

I think we were hoping he would emerge. If he did, nobody told me about it. But on this board, we have people who are hyping our overall roster's ability to accomplish anything when it is clearly thin on talent in most positions. While Kelce is maybe the most visible example, you see a similar scenario with a lot of teams. 3rd and 8 and the TE manages to get open for the FD, or gets open short and bulls his way to it. 3rd and goal from and everybody is covered, low and behold the TE manages to work free at the goal line. It just did not happen here, and really hasn't since Olsen was last healthy. In fairness, CMC is capable of some of those things, and we didn't have him, either. Problem was we had TEs on the active roster who were not doing it. Imagine if you had both? But hey, it was year one of what will wind up being almost a complete roster overhaul before it is over.